Channel
@cafephilo
On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Cite this entry
84subscribers
+7 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.
| Telegram ID | -1001295240684 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @cafephilo |
| Created | Between 1 April 2018 and 31 July 2021 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 9 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 6 October 2026 |
| Measurements held | 5 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 2 times, most recently 6 October 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/cafephilo |
Education — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-FP8, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 27 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 79% confidence. This is a model’s judgement about what the channel is likely to be about, not a fact this register measured the way a subscriber count or a view count is measured — it can be revised on a later pass, and it carries no weight anywhere else on this page. How this classification works, and why it has no browse page of its own yet.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 25 Sept 2026, 12:00 | 84 | +5 |
| 12 Sept 2026, 03:18 | 79 | +1 |
| 4 Sept 2026, 03:37 | 78 | +1 |
| 9 Aug 2026, 20:16 | 77 | no change |
| 7 Aug 2026, 20:31 | 77 | first reading |
20 posts held, back to 5 March 2023 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 1 page of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
Nothing published in the last 30 days. ERR and ER are rolling 30-day measures, so there is nothing to compute — we hold 20 posts for this entry, the most recent from 28 June 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
47 reactions across 14 posts, in 7 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 44.7% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 21 | 44.7% | |
| 👍 | 7 | 14.9% | |
| 🔥 | 7 | 14.9% | |
| 👏 | 4 | 8.51% | |
| 😁 | 3 | 6.38% | |
| 🤓 | 3 | 6.38% | |
| 🙏 | 2 | 4.26% |
No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.
Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.
Coverage. Reactions were read on 14 of the 20 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 47 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 20 most recent posts we hold, published 5 March 2023 to 28 June 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.
Dear friends, The Café-philo is moving to Substack: cafephilo.substack.com Same project, now in a home that suits it better. Subscribe there to keep receiving new pieces. Happy reflecting🤓
❤3
The paradox of self-undermining toleration The paradox of self-undermining toleration has been formulated by Karl Popper. In Open Society and Its Enemies he writes that ‘unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will b…
👍1
Photo, posted without a caption
There has been an ambiguity about the relation between intelligence and morality. While some claim that higher cognitive ability is associated with more enlightened moral intuitions, others indicate it may actually weaken moral foundations. A recent study among UK adults published in the ‘Intelligence’ journal suggests that higher cognitive ability seems to be linked to weaker moral foundations. Nevertheless, it is s…
What is the value free ideal and should scientists strive to uphold it? The value-free ideal states that non-epistemic values (ethical, political, etc. considerations) ought not to influence scientific reasoning. However, there seems to be a near consensus in philosophy rejecting this ideal, particularly on the grounds that it isn’t achievable. Nevertheless, achievability does not deny desirability. This is similar…
❤2
Photo, posted without a caption
How objectivity can be understood in social contexts Is pain objective or subjective? According to the philosopher John Searle, who distinguishes between ontological objectivity and ontological subjectivity, pain is ontologically subjective as its existence depends on me experiencing it, and if I didn’t exist, there would be no instance of pain. A mountain, on the other hand, is ontologically objective as its existe…
🔥1
Photo, posted without a caption
On epistocracy Does being more knowledgeable make you a better voter (or supporter of certain politics in environments where voting is a misnomer)? Intuitively, that sounds right. The problem is, as empirical research suggests, more knowledgeable individuals are more politically partisan and, in turn, are more prone to error and bias. This seems to be particularly so when it comes to beliefs that constitute our ide…
🔥6
Michael Hannon delivering a lecture at the Cumberland Lodge, Windsor Great Park, November 2024.
❤1
An article entitled Why Engineers Should Study Philosophy has been published in Harvard Business Review (!) by the Chief Information Officer (!!) of Goldman Sachs (!!!) of all places: https://hbr.org/2024/04/why-engineers-should-study-philosophy One of the points he makes is that “the ability to develop crisp mental models around the problems you want to solve and understanding the why before you start working on th…
❤4
Is morality objective or relative? Short answer is that it can be both. Objectivity and relativity are not antonyms, these are not competing notions. The antonym of relative is absolute. The antonym of objective is subjective. relative <-> absolute objective <-> subjective Therefore, morality can be both objective and relative. Morality can be objective by providing the best way for each of us to satisfy our prefe…
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @cafephilo. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 25 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Café-philo on ethics” (@cafephilo), 84 subscribers as measured 25 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/cafephilo.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.